Public Diplomacy: Books, Articles, Websites #50

March 9, 2010

Courtesy of Bruce Gregory, Professor of Media and Public Affairs, George Washington University.

Intended for teachers of public diplomacy and related courses, here is an update on resources that may be of general interest. Suggestions for future updates are welcome. Bruce Gregory Adjunct Professor George Washington University/Georgetown University

Carol Atkinson, "Does Soft Power Matter? A Comparative Analysis of Student Exchange Programs, 1980-2006,"Foreign Policy Analysis, Vol. 6, Issue 1, January 2010, 1-22. Atkinson (Vanderbilt University) uses empirical methods and data collected for the years 1980-2006 to evaluate the impact of U.S. civilian and military exchanges on political behavior and institutions in the home countries of exchange participants from "nondemocratic" states. She tests three hypotheses relevant to impact: (1) the depth and extent of social interactions during the exchange experience, (2) the sharing of a sense of community or common identity between participants and their hosts, and (3) the attainment of politically influential positions by exchange participants when they return home. Atkinson finds support for the important role of exchanges "in the diffusion of liberal values and practices in authoritarian states." She discusses possibilities for further research and implications for the design of exchange programs by policymakers. The latter include increasing programs with explicit socialization opportunities, special attention to the under-appreciated value of the International Military Education and Training Program (IMET) and other military exchange programs, and the adverse consequences of using educational exchanges as a negative sanction in countries with poor human rights records.

Robin Brown, "Diplomacy, Public Diplomacy and Social Networks," Paper Prepared for the International Studies Association Conference, New Orleans, February 17-20, 2010. Brown (University of Leeds) argues social network methodologies and underlying social theory offer a range of propositions about the way networks affect social behavior and "a sense of the limits of diplomatic action." Current discussions of network diplomacy, he suggests, tend to separate "practice from its social and political context so that relationship building becomes an end in itself." His paper looks at network concepts in diplomacy and public diplomacy; concepts of agents, actions, and structure; diplomatic practice in networks in a variety of analytical levels; and diplomatic practice as it relates to mapping, building, and exploitation of networks.

Brian M. Burton, Learning from Experience: Lessons from the QDR for the QDDR, Policy Brief, Center for a New American Security (CNAS), January 2010. Burton, a CNAS Research Associate, argues the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) can learn from�� the strengths and limitations of the Defense Department’s Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) process. He examines six lessons: (1) "Establish clear priorities;" (2) "Ensure that strategic priorities become budget priorities;" (3) Look to the future but keep an eye on the present;" (4) "Engage at the top;" (5) "Secure buy-in from Congress, interagency partners, and the broader foreign policy community;" and (6) "The process is as important as the product."

Commander’s Handbook for Strategic Communication and Communication Strategy,Version 2.0, U.S. Joint Forces Command, Joint Warfighting Center, October 27, 2009. In the absence of doctrine and agreement "on the best way to plan and execute strategic communication," this "pre-doctrinal handbook" is intended "to help joint force commanders and their staffs understand alternative perspectives, techniques, procedures, ‘best practices,’ and organizational options." Contains references and material on the meaning of strategic communication, its relevance in a "whole of government" approach to foreign affairs and armed conflict, strategic and operational challenges, and established policy and guidance.

Mai’a K. Davis Cross, "A European Foreign Service: Turning Diplomacy Inside-Out,"Paper Prepared for the International Studies Association Conference, New Orleans, February 17-20, 2010. Cross (University of Southern California) examines opportunities and risks in establishing the European External Action Service (EEAS), the integrated diplomatic structure created by the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty in December 2009. She argues that success in the EU’s internal diplomacy contains lessons for its external diplomacy. If these lessons are not effectively implemented, the EEAS risks becoming an experiment that conflicts with the diplomatic services of member states. Cross concludes it is important for the EEAS to maintain a strong public diplomacy function to (1) present a unified image to the world that can help consolidate internal identity and (2) increase awareness of the EU’s "diplomatic, civilian, and soft power" contributions. "Cultural Diplomacy,"PD Magazine, Winter 2010, Association of Public Diplomacy Scholars, University of Southern California. Includes: Richard T. Arndt, (Retired USIA officer, author of First Resort of Kings), "The Hush-Hush Debate: The Cultural Foundations of U.S. Public Diplomacy"

Yudhishthir Raj Isar, (The American University of Paris), "Cultural Diplomacy: An Overplayed Hand?"Cesar Villanueva Rivas, (Universidad Iberoamericana)"Cosmopolitan Constructivism: Mapping a Road to the Future of Cultural and Public Diplomacy" Sharon Memis, (Director, British Council USA), "Showing the Power of "Cultural Relations": Strategic planning, monitoring and evaluation at the British Council"

Peter Kovach, (Public Diplomacy Officer, U.S. Department of State), "Out from Under the Proscenium: A Paradigm for U.S. Cultural Diplomacy"

Jim Leach, (Chairman, National Endowment for the Humanities), "U.S.A. and UNESCO"

Etienne F. Auge, (Anglo-American University in Prague), " Public Diplomacy in Lebanon" Joseph S. Nye, Jr., (Harvard University), " Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy" Katharine Keith, (PD Magazine), "Interview with Joe Mellot" (Special Assistant to the U.
S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs) Evgeny Morozov, (Foreign Policy magazine), "New Technology and New Public Diplomacy"

Geoffrey Cowan, (University of Southern California), "International Broadcasting" Nina Federoff, (Science and Technology Advisor to the Secretary of State and Administrator of USAID), "21st Century Science Diplomacy"

Alex Evans, Bruce Jones, and David Steven, Confronting the Long Crisis of Globalization: Risk, Resilience, and International Order, The Brookings Institution and The Center on International Cooperation (CIC), New York University, January 26, 2010. In this study, undertaken with funding by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Evans (CIC), Jones (CIC and Brookings), and Steven (CIC and Riverpath Associates) look at risks and opportunities in a new more turbulent era of globalization. The authors call for a foreign policy paradigm grounded in an understanding of systemic weaknesses, threats from networks of state and non-state actors, the need to manage shared risks, and a strategy of resilience. Foundations for cooperation by governments and other actors include: increased bandwidth, aggregating cohesive subgroups, explicit forecasts, stronger signals in ambiguous environments, transparency in competing visions of fairness, and graduated sanctions that repel free riders.

Adam Federman, "Moscow’s New Rules: Islands of Press Freedom in a Country of Control," Columbia Journalism Review, January/February 2010, 29-33. Federman, a New York City based journalist and Russia Fulbright scholar (2003-2004), surveys Russia’s media. He finds much to deplore: Izvestia’sreturn to the Soviet model; threats, assaults, and murder; budget cuts; problems in adjusting to web-based journalism; and lack of a deep tradition of long form investigative reporting. He also finds grounds for optimism. Important stories still get covered. Young reporters and independent media pursue stories that matter. And a growing online community of readers makes control of information increasingly difficult.

Aimee R. Fullman, The Art of Engagement: U.S. Public and Cultural Diplomacy Timeline (October 1999-2009), Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Series on International Cultural Engagement. Fullman (Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, American University) compiles a periodically updated timeline. Her categories: appointment and political events; U.S. Government initiatives; legislation and policy; institutions, investments, and partnerships; and resources, reports and conferences.

Craig Hayden, "Beyond Determinism: Public Diplomacy and New Media Technology in Practice," Paper Prepared for the International Studies Association Conference, New Orleans, February 17-20, 2010. Hayden (American University) argues that efforts to account conceptually for new information and communication technologies reflect related transformations both in the instruments of public diplomacy and communication in support of strategically significant foreign policy objectives. He examines and compares policy rhetoric and programs in two cases: the U.S. use of "public diplomacy 2.0" and Venezuela’s "traditional" international television broadcasting network Telesur.

Alan L. Heil, Jr., "The Ever-Expanding Global Electronic Town Meeting: Challenges Ahead for U.S. International Broadcasting," Perspectives, Layalina Productions, Vol. II, Issue 2, February 2010. The author of Voice of America: A History (2003/2006) and former VOA deputy director contends U.S. funded international broadcasters "are poised to play an unprecedented role in amplifying traditional diplomacy by providing accurate, timely, objective and balanced news and ideas to the rapidly expanding blogosphere." Heil offers an agenda for new leadership in the Broadcasting Board of Governors that includes a review of broadcasting priorities, "exploring the use of social media," expanded training programs and public private partnerships, and stronger protections for journalistic standards.

Peter J. Katzenstein, ed. Civilizations in World Politics: Plural and Pluralist Perspectives,(Routlege, 2010). Katzenstein and the scholars in this collection of essays argue that civilizations co-exist within "one civilization of modernity" and that civilizations are also internally pluralist. Civilizations are highly differentiated with multiple, loosely integrated identities that change in space and time. The authors differ fundamentally with Samuel Huntington’s view of unitary and clashing civilizations, but they also argue that Huntington "offers important, though partial, insights into civilization politics." Their essays examine ways in which civilizations can act coherently under certain circumstances and ways in which they exist as discursive practices. Much of the volume deals with diplomacy, commerce, cultural exchanges, and intersubjective understandings. Includes essays by: Peter J. Katzenstein (Cornell University), "A World of Plural and Pluralist Civilizations: Multiple Actors, Traditions, and Practices" James Kurth (Swarthmore College), "The United States as a Civilizational Leader" Emanuel Adler (University of Toronto), "Europe as a Civilizational Community of Practice" David C. Kang (University of Southern California), "Civilization and State Formation in the Shadow of China" David Leheny (Princeton University), "The Samurai Ride to Huntington’s Rescue: Japan Ponders its Global and Regional Roles" Susanne Hoeber Rudolph (University of Chicago), "Four Variants of Indian Civilization" Bruce B. Lawrence (Duke University), "Islam in Afro-Eurasia: A Bridge Civilization" Patrick Thaddeus Jackson (American University), "How to Think About Civilizations" Jaron Lanier, You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto, (Alfred A. Knopf, 2010).Computer scientist and composer JaronLanier (Microsoft, University of California Berkeley) brings a contrarian and skeptical perspective to his look at technological and cultural issues in today’s internet. Lanier finds much to deplore in Web 2.0, the hive mind, the cloud, the wisdom of crowds, noosphere, wikis, anonymous blog comments, Wikipedia, open source software, privileging computer algorithms over the judgment of individuals, and more. Lanier is no Luddite, however, and reminds throughout that he is "not turning against the internet." He calls for a "digital humanism" and alternatives to "totalist" computing grounded in the individual and human imagination. Noam Lemelshtrich Latar, Gregory Asmolov, and Alex Gekker, "State Cyber Advocacy," Working Paper for the Tenth Annual Herzliya Conference 2010,Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy, and Strategy. In this paper written for scholars and practitioners, Latar (IDC Herzliya), Asmolov (George Washington University), and Gekker (IDC Herzliya) assess opportunities and challenges in using new media for public diplomacy purposes in the context of integrated hard and soft power (smart power) strategies. Because governments cannot control or manipulate networks, the authors contend that governments must learn to adapt to the new reality of networked collaboration by finding those willing to commit themselves willingly to government strategies and by providing them with the tools to do so. Governments generally, and Israel specifically, can transform most effectively in the Web 2.0 internet environment through creation and distribution of user-generated content, spreading their own content through viral means, and creating lasting relationships with relevant audiences through social media. Their recommendations include creating identity through a constant flow of content on photo, video, and other sharing websites; personalized blogs by government employees (balancing personal and professional information); and creating quasi-autonomous new media operations centers to mediate between the state and networks.

Kristin M. Lord, Engaging the Private Sector for the Public Good: The Power of Network DIplomacy, Policy Brief, Center for a New American Security (CNAS), January 2010. Drawing on the vision of "network diplomacy" advanced by Anne-Marie Slaughter, the State Department’s Director of Policy Planning and co-chair of State’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), CNAS VP Kristin Lord renews her call for creation of a USA-World Trust, an organization that "would unleash the power of the private sector to further America’s public diplomacy interests." Her paper restates the recommendations in her 2008 Brookings Institution report, Voices of America: U.S. Public Diplomacy for the 21st Century, and builds on similar recommendations by the Council on Foreign Relations, the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication, the CSIS Commission on Smart Power, the Center for the Study of the Presidency, and the Heritage Foundation.

Andrew MacKay and Steve Tatham, Behavioural Conflict — From General to Strategic Corporal: Complexity, Adaptation and Influence, The Shrivenham Papers, Number 9, Defence Academy of The United Kingdom, December 2009.Major General MacKay (British Army) and Commander Tatham (Royal Navy) examine changes in strategy, command concepts, and education needed for the British military to operate effectively in today’s armed conflict "amongst the people." Their paper discusses transparent information environments; integration of hard and soft power, public opinion, networks, "joined up" efforts by soldiers, aid workers, and diplomats; devolution of authority and responsibility; stovepiped structures and doctrines in defense ministry hierarchies; conceptual approaches to framing choices and adaptive thinking; and the value of life-long education for soldiers and diplomats. Includes a case study of British military activities in Afghanistan’s Helmand province.

Public Diplomacy in the News (PDiN). The recently launched newswire of University of Southern California’s Public Diplomacy Center aggregates "news articles and opinion pieces on public diplomacy from sources around the world." Entries are divided into regions and eight categories: cultural diplomacy, government PD, media & PD, new technology & PD, non-state PD, public opinion, soft power, and nation branding. PDiN is available via RSS, Twitter, Facebook, and by subscription.

Joseph Nye, "Soft Power and Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century," British Council Parliamentary Lecture, January 20, 2010. In this concluding event in the Council’s 75th anniversary lecture series, Nye (Harvard University) restates his views on soft power as an academic concept, responds to his critics, surveys the use of the concept by world leaders and practitioners, discusses ways soft power is wielded through public��diplomacy, comments briefly on new ways of thinking about public diplomacy, and answers questions. See also opening remarks by Martin Davidson, CEO, British Council.

Kenneth A. Osgood and Brian C. Etheridge, eds., The United States and Public Diplomacy: New Directions in Cultural and International History, (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2010), Diplomatic Studies Series, Volume 5, Jan Melissen, editor, Netherlands Institute of International Affairs, ‘Clingendael.’ The scholars in this rich collection examine public diplomacy from a broad range of historical perspectives. Many of the essays look at ways governments, non-governmental organizations, and individuals have used public diplomacy to influence the United States. Other essays examine the relevance of psychological, cultural, and ideological dimensions of U.S. diplomacy to an understanding of U.S. foreign relations and American history. The authors seek to connect two intellectual trends: the study of diplomacy as interaction between states and research focused on a "new cultural history" of foreign relations. Includes: Kenneth Osgood (University of California, Santa Barbara) and Brian C. Etheridge (Ohio State University), "Introduction. The New International History Meets the New Cultural History: Public Diplomacy and U.S. Foreign Relations" Jessica C.E. Gienow-Hect (University of Cologne), "The Anomaly of the Cold War: Cultural Diplomacy and Civil Society Since 1850" David Snyder (University of South Carolina), "The Problem of Power in Modern Public Diplomacy: The Netherlands Information Bureau in World War II and the Early Cold War" John Day Tully (Central Connecticut State University), "Ethnicity, Security, and Public Diplomacy: Irish-Americans and Ireland’s Neutrality in World War II" Neal M. Rosendor
f (University of Southern California), "Hollywood, Tourism, and Dictatorship: Samuel Bronston’s Special Relationship with the Franco Regime" Seth Center (Historical Office, U.S. Department of State), "Supranational Public Diplomacy: The Evolution of the UN Department of Public Information and the Rise of Third World Advocacy" Hector Perla, Jr. (University of California, Santa Cruz), "Transnational Public Diplomacy: Assessing Salvadoran Revolutionary Efforts to Build U.S. Public Opposition to Reagan’s Central America Policy" Justin Hart (Texas Tech University), "Foreign Relations as Domestic Affairs: The Role of the ‘Public’ in the Origins of U.S. Public Diplomacy" Jason C. Parker (Texas A&M University), "Crisis Management and Missed Opportunities: U.S. Public Diplomacy and the Creation of the Third World" Nicholas J. Cull (University of Southern California), "Film as Public Diplomacy: The USIA’s Cold War at Twenty-Four Frames Per Second" Helge Danielson (Norwegian Institute for Defense Studies), "Mediating Public Diplomacy: Local Conditions and U.S. Public Diplomacy in Norway in the 1950s" Michael L. Krenn (Appalachian State University), "Domestic Politics and Public Diplomacy: Appalachian Cultural Exhibits and the Changing Nature of U.S. Public Diplomacy, 1964-1972" Giles Scott-Smith (Leiden University), "Networks of Influence: U.S. Exchange Programs and Western Europe in the 1980s"

Paul Sharp, Diplomatic Theory of International Relations,(Cambridge University Press, 2009). Sharp (University of Minnesota, Duluth) provides a thoughtful examination of ways in which diplomacy and diplomatic theory can contribute to understanding international relations, different kinds of international societies, and critical issues in today’s inter-group relations. His book offers a critique of academic approaches that treat diplomacy as a sub-set of international relations theory, and it makes a case for diplomatic theory "as a coherent and distinctive set of propositions about international relations. Sharp’s analysis is grounded in assumptions about the value people place on living separately in groups, a fundamental difference between intra-group relations and inter-group relations, and diplomacy as management of "relations of separateness." His final chapter is an inquiry into the meaning of public diplomacy, its difference from citizen diplomacy, and a range of probing questions about its use and improvement.

Mizuki Yamanaka, Change in Human Flows Between the United States and Japan, The Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation, March 2010. Yamanaka (Mansfield Foundation Visiting Fellow) looks at trends in exchange visitor flows between the US and Japan from 1980 to 2008. His report analyzes socio-economic and political factors shaping exchanges between the two countries and policy implications for the future. Yamanka recommends "strategically strengthening qualitative exchanges" and identifies ways that US-Japan exchanges can be improved. The report is written in English and Japanese. (Courtesy of Ellen Frost)

Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (YPFP). Based in Washington, DC, with branches in London, Brussels, and New York, YFPF is a nonprofit membership organization, committed "to fostering the next generation of foreign policy leadership . . . [and] to honest, informed, thoughtful discussion of international affairs; the professional advancement, intellectual development, and personal growth of our members; camaraderie within our community; and public service." Washington activities include a public diplomacy discussion group. (Courtesy of Cathryn Sitterding)

R. S. Zaharna, Battles to Bridges: U.S. Strategic Communication and Public Diplomacy after 9/11,(Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). In this study of U.S. public diplomacy, Zaharna (American University) draws on communication research and theory to provide a historical review of the past decade and a framework for preliminary theory building in public diplomacy. Her approach is threefold: (1) an assessment of events, initiatives, and public reports grounded in her argument that challenges to U.S. public diplomacy were broader and more complex than anti-Americanism and image building; (2) an examination of a changing global context in which network communication and cultural forces are shaping U.S. public diplomacy and the perceptions of diverse publics; and (3) a project in theory building at the levels of grand strategy, strategy, and tactics. Zaharna analyzes information and relational frameworks used by societies to understand and solve communication problems. She argues U.S. public diplomacy limits its effectiveness if it relies predominately on one framework. Rather than fight "unwinnable information battles," U.S. public diplomacy "could be more effective by building communication bridges with culturally diverse publics." Gem from the Past

Philip M. Taylor, Munitions of the Mind: A History of Propaganda from the Ancient World to the Present Day, (Manchester University Press, 1990, 3rd edition, 2003). University of Leeds ProfessorPhilip Taylor’s classic study looks at propaganda as a process of persuasion unique to human communication regardless of time and place. His book begins with Neolithic cave drawings and concludes in the 3rd edition with a brief discussion of the world after September 11, 2001. Throughout, his sweeping narrative explores concepts, methods, and purposes of persuasion as a central element in politics and armed conflict. Includes a bibliographic essay. Extensive excerpts of the book are available online at Google Books. Taylor’s website includes lengthy lists of bibliographic resources on public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy and many other topics.